Things you wont see in the MSM

How do you prove you didn't have an affair with someone? Especially to the satisfaction of someone who admits he isn't willing to believe anything you say?

I still haven't seen any proof he DID have an affair. Of course, you just assume the worst, so you don't need to see proof.

 

In case, you didnt get the drift about 'simple to disprove the rumor', it's called blood test.. then DNA if needed.

The story is now not so much about the affair, as the cover-up. Pols, never mind big name lawyers, have affairs all the time. Like I said, they're human and there's plenty of willing 'groupies'.

And I suspect you haven't seen it because you dont want to. The 'wannabe' link had all the circumstantial {smoke=fire} stuff.

If you read it in the NYT, or see it on CNN, would you believe it then? Rest my case; not that the rumor is TRUE.. but that the MSM and net libs are covering up..

 

Please, you're telling me that if there were a DNA test that proved that the other guy (I forget his name) was the father, you wouldn't still claim that Edwards might've had an affair with Hunter, but she was just sleeping with both of them? Even as someone who thinks this probably a load of crap (I mean, seriously, the best factual source is still the National Enquirer, bastion of responsible reporting), a DNA test would merely prove that if Edwards had an affair with Hunter, they didn't have a child. So maybe your despised MSM isn't reporting on this because there doesn't appear to be any basis in fact, everyone involved denies it, and continuing to insinuate that an affair took place in view of those circumstances could be considered libelous?

I mean, come on, you even admit that it's all circumstantial evidence and there's nothing direct. We invaded Iraq based on circumstantial evidence of WMDs and THAT sure turned out well.

 

enough said...

 

Have you READ those 'denials'? Why not post one for us so we can parse it?

Then let him sue. He knows how to do that, surely.

Overwhelming circumstantial evidence including lists of them. Which, disposal of same, werent completely accounted for. Several truckloads went to the Bekaa Valley. But that's only a rumor, too... by two guys who drove the trucks. The SAME rumor as floated in 2003.

Drawing the Line
But... back to rumor and innuendo, Wild Bill's intern fling was just a rumor, too. Until the blue dress (kept intact as a keepsake?) was checked out. We cynics knew all about Bill's womanizing even before the election of '92. It didn't matter much, overall. Just another case of texarkana hijinks rumors dating back before Wilbur Mills and even LBJ. As a neo-con, rather than a RWCC, I dont think we want to look too closely in any candidate's closet. Second, it's none of our business, but most important you rule out too many guys who really want to do the right things for the country but have an achille's heel that make some uncomfortable.
As long as the fault is a personal one, we have to let it pass. If the guy's Republican, that creates a big problem; he's probably going to have to resign as Newt did. Dem's haven't had the same sort of scrutiny, but the 'facts' are always kept in mind in case the Dems want to dump the guy as a standard bearer.
Added: Gary Hart being somewhat an exception as his 'female distractions' were caught out {also by the Enquirer, BTW} at the wrong time in the campaign.
If you dont believe that, witness what's happened to Bill Clinton. The guy hasnt changed a bit. The difference is the Dems now have a new show pony to rally behind and Bill and his foibles get in the way.

But, I suspect the Dem leaning media doesnt want to roil the waters by disposing of two high profile personalities at once.

 

Well, now the first shoe has been dropped and found, the MSM are falling all over themselves explaining in torturous detail {and logic, BTW} why they WERENT covering the story.

Mind you these are college educated people and presumably among the best and brightest. The only thing they dont use as an excuse is that they dont have common sense. which IS their problem, after all.

Just see for yourself with a search under Google-news.